Plausible lunar weapons.

[Squink]

@EdwardLost

If you HAD to have people on the moon in a war, your only hope would be to keep them in a bunker deep underground.

So, ground penetrating nukes for the OP?
Maybe a Davy Crockett to supress any temptation to go “over the top”?

[Projammer]

I’m pretty sure a stock Springfield Armory M6 would be a fairly reliable option.

One other unique feature of the M6 is the “squeeze-bar trigger.” Intended for use by aircrew who might be downed in any type of weather and terrain, the trigger, hammer and barrel latch are designed to be easily operated while wearing heavy gloves or even mittens.

Although loading a 22 cartridge in suit gloves would probably be challenging.

[kopek]

I don’t know that this deserves a new thread but ----- considering the lack of friction and all what would the effective range be for something like a .50cal on the moon? I can see the sniper mentioned before needing to have his spotter in orbit just to call his hits.

[Alka_Seltzer]

@kopek

I don’t know that this deserves a new thread but ----- considering the lack of friction and all what would the effective range be for something like a .50cal on the moon? I can see the sniper mentioned before needing to have his spotter in orbit just to call his hits.

There are going to be three factors that increase the effective range, lower gravity, no air resitance and the fact the surface has a smaller diameter (more curved, for a long-range shot it will make a difference).

If they run out of ammo, they can always beat each other to death with moon rocks.

[Squink]

@Alka_Seltzer

If they run out of ammo, they can always beat each other to death with moon rocks.

Yes, pointy sticks’d be right out though, or at least limited to being a “rich man’s weapon.”

[TV_time]

@Elendil_s_Heir

If I remember the Clarke story correctly, the U.S. and Soviet moonbases got into a “defense race” of sorts, with each trying to build a bigger and thicker wall to absorb the impact of the previously-fired low-orbiting slugs.

If there was a military necessity, I’m sure the bright lads and lasses at DARPA could come up with some kind of airtight, internally-lubricated rifle that could withstand the temperature extremes of the lunar surface. It wouldn’t surprise me if there are plans for that sort of thing already.

In Clarke’s novel Earthlight, he has a large electromagnet-propelled bayonet of liquid metal that seems very doable and I have heard that DARPA is, in fact, working on just this.

[BMalion]

Hell, just tell them they have to drink Tang and eat space-food sticks the rest of their lives, they’ll probubly just commit suicide.

[PatriotGrrrl]

@Sailboat

Maybe, but firearms have some different requirements. They need gas-tight sliding parts (they can’t use gaps in the systems that depend on gas pressure) and the same parts have to resist shock – you can’t use a pliable soft rubber seal like you could on a spacesuit.

You obviously don’t own an AK47 or an SKS. Their gas systems are far from gas-tight. This is one of the factors that make them so reliable.

[Stranger_On_A_Train]

@davekhps

Okay, power remains a problem. But how about a particle beam instead?

So you’re going to carry a cyclotron around with you to provide ammunition for your weapon? Good luck with that.

Stranger

[HorseloverFat]

So is there any consensus? In my little scenario I see this as being primarily a defense weapon. Something handed to a crew “just in case.” Perhaps a gyrojet pistol or rifle modified to fit a gloved hand. Everything else seems to have problems with recoil.

[RickJay]

@Der_Trihs

It seems to me that recoil might be a serious concern with the low gravity.

The recoil of small arms is generally not significant enough that different gravity would make any difference.

[Der_Trihs]

@TV_time

In Clarke’s novel Earthlight, he has a large electromagnet-propelled bayonet of liquid metal that seems very doable and I have heard that DARPA is, in fact, working on just this.

I found a link to a story about that; MAHEM. “Magneto Hydrodynamic Explosive Munition”; someone had fun coming up with that acronym.

[ChrisBooth12]

Muskets, simple is usually better

[Kaboodle]

I keep seeing mention of using bow and arrow or crossbow. Would an arrow be any use at all? Sure, it could penetrate a space suit but I don’t think there’s any way to ensure that the arrow keeps flying point first.

I’ve seen videos on Mythbusters and Time Warp that show arrows ‘wobble’ in flight. I would think that it’s only the fletching on the arrow that keeps it pointed in the right direction.

In the near vacuum of the Moon the fletching would have no effect, at least that’s my reasoning. Am I wrong or would an arrow just as likely end up flying sideways as point first?

[ivn1188]

I have serious doubts that most rifles would have any problems at all. They are mechanically simple and robust, especially a bolt-action. Lubricants are not a problem, there are plenty of dry lubricants like moly-kote, and frankly, lubricants aren’t even that necessary for a lot of parts. Dust might be a nuisance, but if we can build tanks and suits that protect from bio and chem agents, it’s trivial to keep dust out.

Recoil is not a factor, especially with things like a 5.56 mm.

Heat, not a problem. Guns that aren’t machine guns don’t get that hot, that fast, and it’s certainly easy to build some sort of heat sink if needed, even if it’s just thermal mass, like a big cast iron chunk.

Mechanical problems? No. Guns don’t require a lot of precision. Really accurate guns require precision, but there’s no rubber seals or anything like that, it’s all metal on metal. Rifles, especially military rifles, are pretty darn robust and aren’t going to be too worried about environmental conditions, even on the moon.

[MrDibble]

Why worry about all the effects of vaccuum on weapons? Just put your weapon in its own space suit…
…what?

[Sunspace]

I was going to mention electromagentic induction, but I think that still needs a large power source, so won’t do for portable weapons.

@Stranger_On_A_Train

So you’re going to carry a cyclotron around with you to provide ammunition for your weapon? Good luck with that.

Well, if it worked for the Ghostbusters…

[EdwardLost]

@ivn1188

Mechanical problems? No. Guns don’t require a lot of precision. Really accurate guns require precision, but there’s no rubber seals or anything like that, it’s all metal on metal. Rifles, especially military rifles, are pretty darn robust and aren’t going to be too worried about environmental conditions, even on the moon.

Would there be any benefit to a rifled barrel in a vacuum?

[Squink]

@EdwardLost

Would there be any benefit to a rifled barrel in a vacuum?

You might get a few more FPS out of a given charge of powder because the charge doesn’t have to push the air in the barrel out of the way at supersonic speed.

[Stranger_On_A_Train]

@EdwardLost

Would there be any benefit to a rifled barrel in a vacuum?

The purpose of rifling is to impart spin for stabilization. It has nothing to do with the presence or absence of atmosphere.

Stranger